Research Article

Sensing anthropology: A critical review of the sensorial turn in anthropology

Arjang Omrani 1 *
More Detail
1 Department of Educational Sciences, University of Ghent, Ghent, BELGIUM* Corresponding Author
Mediterranean Journal of Social & Behavioral Research, 7(3), October 2023, 127-133, https://doi.org/10.30935/mjosbr/13348
Published Online: 05 June 2023, Published: 01 September 2023
OPEN ACCESS   820 Views   623 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

This article aims to present the existing epistemological ties between the sensorial turn in anthropology and collaborative forms of production of knowledge in the framework of shared anthropology. From this perspective, the major debates in anthropology regarding the senses and emotions and their epistemological implications will be critically analyzed. The focus firstly lies on questioning those approaches that approach the senses and the body as another traditional subject for anthropological studies. Secondly, on exploring the existing misconceptions in the sensory approach. Thirdly, on claiming that the most valid form of exploring and presenting the state of experience is through integrating collaborative engagement of the subject, optimally through the framework of shared anthropology. Lastly, the potentials and advantages of audio-visual media and art in general as the medium of (re)presentation will be explored.
Keywords: shared anthropology, sensorial turn, emotions, senses

CITATION (APA)

Omrani, A. (2023). Sensing anthropology: A critical review of the sensorial turn in anthropology. Mediterranean Journal of Social & Behavioral Research, 7(3), 127-133. https://doi.org/10.30935/mjosbr/13348

REFERENCES

  1. Classen, C. (1993). Worlds of sense: Exploring the senses in history and across cultures. Routledge.
  2. Crawford, P. (2010). Sounds of silence: The aural in anthropology and ethnographic film. In G. Iversen, & J. K. Simonsen (Eds.), Beyond the visual: Sound and image in ethnographic and documentary film (pp. 49-22). Intervention Press.
  3. Deleuze, G. (1986). Cinema. Bloomsbury Philosophy Library. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350251977
  4. Gadamer, H. (1975). Truth and method. Seabury Press.
  5. Ginsburg, F. (1995). Parallax effect: The coloniality of power in ethnographic film. Visual Anthropology Review, 11(2), 63-78. https://doi.org/10.1525/var.1995.11.2.64
  6. Howes, D. (1991). The varieties of sensory experience: A sourcebook in the anthropology of the senses. University of Toronto Press.
  7. Howes, D. (2010). “Response to Sarah Pink.” Social Anthropology, 18(3), 333-336 & 338-340. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8676.2010.00119_4.x
  8. Howes, D. (2011a). Hearing scents, tasting sights: Toward a cross-cultural multimodal theory of aesthetics. In F. Bacci, & D. Mellon (Eds.), Art and the senses (pp. 82-161). Oxford University Press.
  9. Howes, D. (2011b). “Reply to Tim Ingold.” Social Anthropology, 19(3), 318-322. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8676.2011.00164.x
  10. Ingold, T. (2000). The perception of the environment essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill. Routledge.
  11. Jackson, M. (2013). Lifeworlds: Essays in existential anthropology. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226923666.001.0001
  12. Langer, S. K. (1954). Philosophy in a new key: A study in the symbolism of reason, rite and art. The New American Library.
  13. MacDougall, D. (2005). The corporeal image film, ethnography, and the senses. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400831562
  14. Marks, L. (2000). The skin of the film: Intercultural cinema, embodiment, and the senses. Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822381372
  15. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1964). Signs. Northwestern University Press.
  16. Newell, F., & Shams, L. (2007). New insights into multisensory perception. Perception, 36, 1415-1417. https://doi.org/10.1068/p3610ed
  17. Omrani, A. (2011). Parallax. https://vimeo.com/32156598
  18. Pink, S. (2009). Doing sensory ethnography. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249383
  19. Pink, S. (2010). “Response to David Howes.” Social Anthropology, 18(3), 331-333 & 336-338. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8676.2010.00119_3.x
  20. Reddy, W. (2001). The navigation of feeling: A framework for the history of emotions. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511512001
  21. Rouch, R. (2003). Cine-ethnography. University of Minnesota Press.
  22. Rutten, K. (2016). Art, ethnography and practice-led research. Critical Arts-South-North Cultural and Media Studies, 30(3), 295-306. https://doi.org/10.1080/02560046.2016.1205317
  23. Schneider, A., & Wright, C. (2010). Between art and anthropology: Contemporary ethnographic practice. Berg Publisher.
  24. Shimojo, S., & Shams, L. (2001). Sensory modalities are not separate modalities: Plasticity and interactions. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 11(4), 505-509. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0959-4388(00)00241-5
  25. Starobinsky, J. (1982). A short history of body consciousness. In D. Rieff (Ed.), Humanities in review (pp. 1-29). Cambridge University Press.
  26. Wetherell, M. (2012). Affect and emotion: A new social science understanding. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446250945